Five Ways Occupy Wall Street Changed the Debate

Occupy Wall Street protesters march on Wall Street around the New York Stock Exchange on Nov. 25, 2011.

Associated Press

You know a movement such as Occupy Wall Street is over when they start writing pieces about the group’s legacy.

And there’s been no shortage of commentary reflecting on Occupy, which burst onto the scene two years ago this month when protesters pitched a camp just a couple of blocks from Wall Street at Zuccotti Park.

Unlike Occupy’s alter ego–the Tea Party movement–the pundits, talking heads and even former members talk about Occupy in the past tense. A second-anniversary rally on Tuesday received only scant coverage in the media.

Occupy, when measured against other movements–the Tea Party, immigration reform or civil rights–certainly seems like a failure. There never seemed to be any agreement on the group’s shape-shifting goals, but if there was a consensus, nothing came to pass. Housing and health care for all, the return of Glass-Steagall, the elimination of debt–sovereign to student–never occurred.

Recent statistics suggest Occupy’s biggest cause, to rebalance income inequality. has gone the other way. An updated study released this month by economist Emmanuel Saez noted that the top 1% of wealthiest Americans “are close to full recovery while bottom 99% incomes have hardly started to recover.”

“Occupy,” it seems, turned into “vacate” pretty fast.

At least, that’s the simple look. A deeper analysis suggests that the movement has been more effective than it’s been given credit. Though its most strident critics may disagree, Occupy had a broad cultural and political influence that resonates to this day.

• Recharge of the political left. Though Occupy Wall Street declared itself to be independent of any political party, it was populated by members of the traditional base (unions, for instance) of the Democratic Party. Though it didn’t match the political force of the rival Tea Party, by influencing individual primaries and elections in the 2012 elections, it did energize a few races including Sen. Sherrod Brown’s, (D.-Ohio), re-election and the surprising victory of Elizabeth Warren over incumbent Scott Brown for the Massachusetts senate seat once held by Edward Kennedy. Both Mr. Brown of Ohio and Ms. Warren actively sought and received the support of Occupy. A fact acknowledged by Ms. Warren’s bank-blasting speech at the Democratic convention in 2012. Moreover, Occupy appeared to help energize a base of young voters that had become disenfranchised from the political establishment, helping Barack Obama to grab the lion’s share of young and minority voters.

• Wall Street reform. Glass-Steagall may not be back, but it at least entered the discussion. Sens. Brown and Ms. Warren introduced a bill to bring back the law that splits traditional banking from investment banking to much fanfare this summer. There have been smaller victories too. U.S. regulators, including the Federal Reserve and Securities and Exchange Commission, have been more aggressive in their watchdog roles. New SEC Chairman Mary Jo White has surprised some, by stiffening settlement terms with brokerages and requiring them to admit wrongdoing and exposing them to civil lawsuits.

• Debt reform. Occupy wanted the nations, banks and lenders of the world to forgive debt. It was a silly notion, but had an intuitive truth that debt had become so burdensome it was oppressive to the societies carrying it. That’s why globally there is a new pushback against fiscal austerity in debt-ridden countries such as Greece, Ireland and even the United States. It’s why debate over the rates charged for student loans became a front-burner issue this summer in Congress and it has arguably emboldened the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to push for new rules that have brought big banks to the negotiating table.

• Community. Arguably Occupy Wall Street’s greatest hour came more than a year after the group was evicted from Zuccotti Park. When Superstorm Sandy hit the East Coast, Occupy activists organized and fanned out to help victims in the hardest hit areas. It wasn’t just the relief efforts that were the group’s legacy but the example of community responsibility that the group showed. In a way, Occupy’s lack of a specific agenda provided the flexibility to leap into action. It also galvanized the group’s core belief that we’re all in it together.

• Income inequality. Occupy’s primary objective was to bring fairness back into the game. It argued for higher wages, higher taxes on the rich, educational opportunities and against the big paydays given to top executives on Wall Street and across corporate America. And as mentioned before, almost none of this has happened. What has happened: income inequality is right up there in the national debate. The 99%, which refers to the vast majority of Americans who take home just 80% of national income, is commonplace term in the economic discussion. It colors talk of Obamacare, monetary policy, government spending and taxes. President Obama argued in his state of the union address to raise the minimum wage to $9 an hour from $7.25. He struck a deal to eliminate some of the Bush-era tax cuts. And in his speech marking the 50th anniversary of the civil rights march on Washington, he said income inequality was the part of Martin Luther King’s “dream” that remained unfulfilled.

In the end, Occupy Wall Street may end up as a footnote of the financial crisis: a flash fire of frustration against big bailouts and economic disparities. But even the movement’s biggest detractors had to at least grapple with Occupy’s arguments. For a while, at least, Occupy got into our faces.

And the ultimate victory may be that its message is still in our heads.